One of the new theories on human evolution is now referred to as the “Leaky Replacement” theory. (See diagram below.) Here is a tweet from John Hawks from yesterday: “Me in class today: ‘Out of Africa with leakage?’ Are you kidding me? They make it sound like the condom broke!”
The reason I am posting this, is due to me making the comment above that “the truth probably lies somewhere in between,” that is, between “Out of Africa” and “Multiregionalism.” From what I am hearing it seems to be correct, but it doesn’t imply that merging the two theories into a new one is the solution. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
I’m not sure I see any distinction between the two diagrams other than the addition, which had already been publicized, that there was some interbreeding between the two branches.
(Which, as I’ve said before, accounts for the Tea Partyers among homo sapiens. )
There are actually three different scenarios here, Occam. The Out-of-Africa one is now officially dead as it didn’t allow for any interbreeding between the different human groups. Multiregionalism and the new “Leaky Replacement” are still possible but there are lots of problems with both theories.
There are actually three different scenarios here, Occam. The Out-of-Africa one is now officially dead as it didn’t allow for any interbreeding between the different human groups. .
How so? Everything I have read and can find, point to an African origin for humans. That is still ‘Out-of-Africa’. Every anthropologist I know (two) and know of, point to Africa as the origin of the human species.
There are actually three different scenarios here, Occam. The Out-of-Africa one is now officially dead as it didn’t allow for any interbreeding between the different human groups. .
How so? Everything I have read and can find, point to an African origin for humans. That is still ‘Out-of-Africa’. Every anthropologist I know (two) and know of, point to Africa as the origin of the human species.
The only thing I can find, calling Out of Africa ‘dead’ is one blog called Istar’s Gate and he is an obvious crackpot. I’d like to know who killed it and why it is not general knowledge. We know that the migration is more complicated than previously thought, but as far as I can tell, Anthropologists still agree on Africa as the origin of the various human species. To clarify; I am asking for peer reviewed, published citations, in major scientific journals.
Of course humans come from Africa, there is no question about it. What is not clear is when it happened and “who” exactly came out of Africa. Was it H. erectus or H. sapiens? Or are they the same species? Are all the Homo groups one species?
Regarding Out-of-Africa, once again, the theory doesn’t allow for interbreeding with other human groups (species?) and is therefore no longer valid. That is why they are now proposing an updated version based on Out-of-Africa, called “Leaky Replacement” (or that’s what they are trying to call it for now, anyway). I could try to go into all the details why “Out-of-Africa-with-Leakage” still doesn’t prove that H. sapiens left Africa around 70,000 years ago but it would take me some time to write it all down and, frankly, I don’t really understand all of it. But some of the major problems include the supposed population bottleneck prior to “our” exodus from Africa where, IIRC (I don’t have my books with me), there would had to be mere 50 females living at a time for about the period of six thousand years, the problems with the genetic clock leading us to our Adam (Y chromosome) and Eve (mtDNA), and the fact that some human groups such as the Australian Aborigines resemble more closely the archaic humans in Australia than the modern men (whoever those are).
If you think I am on a mission here to find an evidence to help me support my racist agenda, you couldn’t be more mistaken. Multiregionalism actually sounds a lot less racist than Out-of-Africa, where according to the Out-of-Africa picture some peoples would fall closer to our primitive ancestors than others.
Also, Asanta, to answer your question as to “who killed Out-of-Africa” the answer is obviously the Neandertals. But I have to add a caviat here: there is a possibility—a very small one—that H. sapiens never interbred with the Neandertals and that the genes we share come form our common ancestor. But again, the chances of that are very small.
Of course humans come from Africa, there is no question about it. What is not clear is when it happened and “who” exactly came out of Africa. Was it H. erectus or H. sapiens? Or are they the same species? Are all the Homo groups one species?
Regarding Out-of-Africa, once again, the theory doesn’t allow for interbreeding with other human groups (species?) and is therefore no longer valid. That is why they are now proposing an updated version based on Out-of-Africa, called “Leaky Replacement” (or that’s what they are trying to call it for now, anyway). I could try to go into all the details why “Out-of-Africa-with-Leakage” still doesn’t prove that H. sapiens left Africa around 70,000 years ago but it would take me some time to write it all down and, frankly, I don’t really understand all of it. But some of the major problems include the supposed population bottleneck prior to “our” exodus from Africa where, IIRC (I don’t have my books with me), there would had to be mere 50 females living at a time for about the period of six thousand years, the problems with the genetic clock leading us to our Adam (Y chromosome) and Eve (mtDNA), and the fact that some human groups such as the Australian Aborigines resemble more closely the archaic humans in Australia than the modern men (whoever those are).
If you think I am on a mission here to find an evidence to help me support my racist agenda, you couldn’t be more mistaken. Multiregionalism actually sounds a lot less racist than Out-of-Africa, where according to the Out-of-Africa picture some peoples would fall closer to our primitive ancestors than others.
I just talked to an actively researching anthropologist I know, and he told me “Out of Africa is more ‘alive’ than ever”. EVERY human species came out of Africa. The genesis of our species is Africa. I don’t understand why you think this theory ‘doesn’t allow for inbreeding’, (and neither does the anthropologist).
If you think I am on a mission here to find an evidence to help me support my racist agenda, you couldn’t be more mistaken. Multiregionalism actually sounds a lot less racist than Out-of-Africa, where according to the Out-of-Africa picture some peoples would fall closer to our primitive ancestors than others.
I called you mistaken, not racist (btw, you still have no citations). You are also mistaken in thinking that the Out of Africa picture means some people would fall closer to our primitive ancestors than others. You clearly do not understand evolution. Your claim is similar to the creationist claim of “why are there still monkeys”.
)
